Welcome to the 2013-2014 Cycle

[TakeMyCoffeeBlack]

I think that the process of cutting down from 400 to 80 is pretty scary, but I imagine the process of 80 to 40 is potentially even more arbitrary.  

 

P.S. Cautiouslyoptimistic - I hope this is not keeping you awake! It must be 2AM where you are right now.

 

That's probably the point where it's no longer about the obvious things (fit, past performance, LORs, etc.) and more about... who even knows. Wow, to think that our names are just being scratched off lists. There's something existential about that.

[IRToni]

 

That's probably the point where it's no longer about the obvious things (fit, past performance, LORs, etc.) and more about... who even knows. Wow, to think that our names are just being scratched off lists. There's something existential about that.

 

I'm guessing at this point, there will be a couple that professors absolutely want, and a couple where something doesn't quite fit. The rest might be just up for grabs (e.g. we had someone doing this just graduate, so we could use him/her; or: we have one person with similar interests in first year, so don't need person X?).

[o.j.]

I'm guessing at this point, there will be a couple that professors absolutely want, and a couple where something doesn't quite fit. The rest might be just up for grabs (e.g. we had someone doing this just graduate, so we could use him/her; or: we have one person with similar interests in first year, so don't need person X?).

 

 

 

I always think that we are being pitched against this one other person (who is obviously far smarter than me in my head). In all likelihood, we are probably pitched against a range of candidates. So for instance in comparative sub-field, they might have top 20 (assuming we make it from 400 to 80 and 20 per sub-field), then all professors sit around looking at the files. Then they go, oh that Oxbridge person with a top tier journal publication has to get in. All others agree. I imagine that the top 5-6 candidates get overall roars of agreement. 

 

It is the bottom 7-10 where there is likely to be more debate... 

Edited January 20, 2014 by o.j.

[sylark]

Well, I am applying to a few schools for the Feb 1st. Deadline and I am reconsidering the contents of my SOP.

 

I have been given conflicting infomation regarding POI's these past few months. Some will say that listing several professors is essential whereas others have told me that there is a risk of selecting professors that are not part of the adcom, retiring, are in conflict with other adcom members, ect. and listing POI's can limit the department's overall interest. I have submitted my SOP's to include my specific research areas and then went on to speak for the subfields of American Politics and Politcal Theory in a general sense in order to demonstrate fit. For instance, one school I have applied to specializes in immigration, race, diversity, urban politcs, politcal psychology, ect. I made the case that I was concerned with studying the divergence of political attitudes by race in the United States and the effects it has on public policy, namely political polarization. Further, I conveyed an interest in examining policy that affects politcal attitudes of ethnicities/races differently. Then, I went on to explain my senior thesis that demonstrates this interest in-part; my thesis is more generally considered with cultural diversity and the consequences of isolation and divergence among different races, ethnicities, religions, sexual orientations, ect. in voting behavior and hyperpartisanship. Lastly, I listed the subfield faculty's strengths and expertise aformentioned, including the specific courses available. However, I didn't list any professors specifically.

 

Should I include POI's for upcoming applications or is my strategy proficient?

[timeless90]

I meant this business week that will commence on Tuesday, after the holiday. While some people may be on campus working today, all will be back by then.

As far as yield goes, I believe that they cut the 80 application figure nearly in half, to 30-40. Not all admitted students accept the offers (those crazies!), leading to a lower yield than what was postulated above.

 

Ok, things are really progressing quickly now ! 

At this rate, Stanford may be delivering the first batch of admissions in the first week of February. 

I doubt cutting down from 80 to 30-40 would take 2+ weeks

[o.j.]

Well, I am applying to a few schools for the Feb 1st. Deadline and I am reconsidering the contents of my SOP.

 

I have been given conflicting infomation regarding POI's these past few months. Some will say that listing several professors is essential whereas others have told me that there is a risk of selecting professors that are not part of the adcom, retiring, are in conflict with other adcom members, ect. and listing POI's can limit the department's overall interest. I have submitted my SOP's to include my specific research areas and then went on to speak for the subfields of American Politics and Politcal Theory in a general sense in order to demonstrate fit. For instance, one school I have applied to specializes in immigration, race, diversity, urban politcs, politcal psychology, ect. I made the case that I was concerned with studying the divergence of political attitudes by race in the United States and the effects it has on public policy, namely political polarization. Further, I conveyed an interest in examining policy that affects politcal attitudes of ethnicities/races differently. Then, I went on to explain my senior thesis that demonstrates this interest in-part; my thesis is more generally considered with cultural diversity and the consequences of isolation and divergence among different races, ethnicities, religions, sexual orientations, ect. in voting behavior and hyperpartisanship. Lastly, I listed the subfield faculty's strengths and expertise aformentioned, including the specific courses available. However, I didn't list any professors specifically.

 

Should I include POI's for upcoming applications or is my strategy proficient?

 

I think you have done the right thing by tailoring your statement to indicate research interests and fit. However, as a lay reader,  I would find it strange if you didn't already have particular faculty you would like to work with given that you have gone to such lengths to indicate fit. So I would say mention 2-3 POIs to narrow your interests slightly.

 

That said I saw one personal statement which didn't list POIs specifically, but referred extensively to the person's work and the ideas he had related to that person's work. The person got in almost all the places he applied to.

 

I am not sure that listing a POI who other adcom members don't like will jeopardise your application, but let's assume for a second that it does. In that case, an adcom member will be able to discern which POI you are likely to work with from your research interests, and if he doesn't like the other POI then the result will be the same whether you list a POI or not. Same goes for retiring POIs.

 

Ad com members are probably more likely to take your interests into account, and will not base decisions entirely on your selection of POIs.  If it turns out that there is no one to supervise your research then it is probably in your interest to not go there anyway!

Edited January 20, 2014 by o.j.

[timeless90]

Stanford has better weather, so maybe their yield is higher?^^ Guess Stanford's will be closer to 40 then, since princeton and Stanford are kind of peer competitors. I'm guessing there will be some people with offers from more than one HYPS school, and then there will be the odd person turning down a HYPS school for other programs (better fit? I think Rochester sometimes got people that turned down HYPS, possibly other top-5 schools), so 50% might not be that far off.

 

Agree. 

Yale actually notes in its website that it offers admissions to double the number of the entering class. 

They also seem to follow the pick 40 enroll 20 trend.

But Yale gets 600+ applicants. I wonder what attracts more applicants to Yale vis-a-vis HSP (for that matter Princeton gets around 500, and Harvard below 500). 

Per the yield game, I do not have access to any data, but it is my impression that Harvard leads the hyps pack.

In one of the recent years they accepted 29 but their class size from what I know is 25 ish. 

Anyway, this is what i gathered from browsing the gradcafe but hope anyone with additional info can correct me if I am wrong. 

[TakeMyCoffeeBlack]

I have been given conflicting infomation regarding POI's these past few months. Some will say that listing several professors is essential whereas others have told me that there is a risk of selecting professors that are not part of the adcom, retiring, are in conflict with other adcom members, ect. and listing POI's can limit the department's overall interest. 

 

Sure, those are all "risks," but I don't think they're highly risky. There's always a chance that your preferred POI might be retiring (well, not always the chance in the case that they're very young, but perhaps a professor is leaving for another opportunity), for example, but the department can then decide a.) well, the only professor that could have fit this student substantively is gone or b.) we may be saying goodbye to Prof. X, but young recruit Prof. Y is doing similar research that might interest this student. 

 

I think when you identify POIs, more than anything, you're showing 1.) that you've done your research 2.) that there are people doing similar research to yours in the department, and therefore you fit and 3.) that, having faculty you admire and are interested in learning from or working under, you are more likely to accept an offer of admission.

 

Of course, there are always exceptions to every rule.

[aecp]

These trolls are significantly impacting my ability to enjoy a solid three-day weekend (Yay, MLK, Jr.!).

Anyhow, although I know our anxiety levels are already quite high, here's some news. I found out a bit of information re: Stanford. Next week they will cut approximately 400 applications down to 80. Afterward, they will further scrutinize that group of 80 for final spots.*

Presumably, other large schools are operating on a similar schedule. This means the veracity of any admissions claims made too swiftly can be called into question (take note, silly trolls claiming spots at top-10 programs with February deadlines).

If you would like to join me in panic driven weeping, please do so...now...

*Source: Live & work @ Stanford. Secondary source information which derived from AdCom grad volunteer.

Could you share some light on how they will reduce the 400 to 80? GREs? GPAs? SOPs?  Undergraduate school?

 

Many thanks for the info.

[sylark]

 

 

I think you have done the right thing by tailoring your statement to indicate research interests and fit. However, as a lay reader,  I would find it strange if you didn't already have particular faculty you would like to work with given that you have gone to such lengths to indicate fit. So I would say mention 2-3 POIs to narrow your interests slightly.

 

That said I saw one personal statement which didn't list POIs specifically, but referred extensively to the person's work and the ideas he had related to that person's work. The person got in almost all the places he applied to.

 

I am not sure that listing a POI who other adcom members don't like might jeopardise your application, but let's assume for a second that it does. In that case, an adcom member will be able to discern which POI you are likely to work with from your research interests, and if he doesn't like the other POI then the result will be the same whether you list a POI or not. Same goes retiring POIs.

 

Ad com members are probably more likely to take your interests into account, and will not base decisions entirely on your selection of POIs.  If it turns out that there is no one to supervise your research then it is probably in your interest to not go there anyway

 

 

Thanks for the quick reply. I will list a few POI's in my Feb 1st applications. Great Explanation!

 

Another question I have is about the applications I have sent to schools a month to one week ago. Could I simply email a couple POI's directly?

 

For instance,

 

"Dear Dr. ______

 

My name is ________, and I have applied to the Fall 2014 Politcal Science phD Program at ____________ . I am inquiring your interest in my academic background and research interests. My senior thesis examined _______, and I would like to continue researching _________ at graduate school. I also have an extensive background in the following coursework________. (somehow work in UGPA as well). Your research on _______ is fascinating... Further, your expertise/research in ____, ______, and _______ suit my academic interests. If given the opportunity, I would be honored to recieve your guidance and assist your future research endeavors.

 

Thank you for your consideration.

 

 

Best Regards,

 

_____________________________

(Ignore any spelling errors. The school computers don't have spell-check on their browsers)

 

Any suggestions about the tone of the email...given that emailing after sending an application is even advisable.

The idea is to keep it short and to the point, to not sound like a nuisance, and not waste the professor's valuable time.

 

Thanks in advance everyone.

Edited January 20, 2014 by sylark

[timeless90]

Could you share some light on how they will reduce the 400 to 80? GREs? GPAs? SOPs?  Undergraduate school?

 

Many thanks for the info.

 

An unsolicited opinion here, but my take is that if there is a group of 400 applicants, the truly competitive ones should not exceed 100. 

There will be people with GPAs and GREs distinctively low, so they will be eliminated. 

International applicants with poor English proficiency, they will be cut. 

And I suspect many if not most people aren't able to write quality SOP's, which is understandable because there isn't any official format/guideline for the document. But this doesn't mean that "no good" SOP's are not apparent to the readers. 

Undergrad schools wont make or break the deal from what I gather, but I assume the hyps applicants will receive a degree of "bonus points." 

So my point is, after eliminating people using the criteria you've pointed out in isolation or in combination, the ones the adcoms will truly pay attention to probably would not exceed 100. 

[IR IR IR PhD]

Anyone willing to claim the Texas A&M? Or are those suspect too?

 

I recently had a class with a Texas A&M Professor (visiting) who knows the admissions process there very well. I'm happy to share his insights from the summer (this does not mean that they hold true for this cycle). 

 

1. Texas A&M has smaller stipends than other schools in Texas - Rice and UT Austin. According to my Professor, this has to do with College Station being particularly affordable. However, they are trying to up their stipends because they are consistently loosing top candidates to institutions with lower rankings but better stipends. They really care about ranking - USWN 25 now - and want to be considered a t20 program by 2020.  

 

2. 10,000 seems unusually small for Texas A&M given what I've said above. I never spoke specifics with my Professor but he suggested, based on comparative schools, something closer to 15,000-20,000. For an admit to hear this early and to be given 10,000 seems a bit suspicious (just my feeling). 

 

3. Texas A&M is a quant focused program. My professor told me they look very closely at GRE quant scores and other math related indicators (especially compared to other programs). I find it HIGHLY suspect that multiple of these admits posted on the results page have sub 150 quant scores. 

 

Moral of the story is... something fishy is going on here. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some serious trolling going on. 

[TakeMyCoffeeBlack]

Moral of the story is... something fishy is going on here. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some serious trolling going on. 

 

I had suspected as much. Thanks for the insights.

[sylark]

I recently had a class with a Texas A&M Professor (visiting) who knows the admissions process there very well. I'm happy to share his insights from the summer (this does not mean that they hold true for this cycle). 

 

1. Texas A&M has smaller stipends than other schools in Texas - Rice and UT Austin. According to my Professor, this has to do with College Station being particularly affordable. However, they are trying to up their stipends because they are consistently loosing top candidates to institutions with lower rankings but better stipends. They really care about ranking - USWN 25 now - and want to be considered a t20 program by 2020.  

 

2. 10,000 seems unusually small for Texas A&M given what I've said above. I never spoke specifics with my Professor but he suggested, based on comparative schools, something closer to 15,000-20,000. For an admit to hear this early and to be given 10,000 seems a bit suspicious (just my feeling). 

 

3. Texas A&M is a quant focused program. My professor told me they look very closely at GRE quant scores and other math related indicators (especially compared to other programs). I find it HIGHLY suspect that multiple of these admits posted on the results page have sub 150 quant scores. 

 

Moral of the story is... something fishy is going on here. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some serious trolling going on. 

 

Certainly. The GRE Scores and GPA's are blatantly not up to par with the program's standards.

Seems fairly obvious that it's a troll who posted those results.

Edited January 20, 2014 by sylark

[IR IR IR PhD]

"Dear Dr. ______

 

My name is ________, and I have applied to the Fall 2014 Politcal Science phD Program at ____________ . I am inquiring your interest in my academic background and research interests. My senior thesis examined _______, and I would like to continue researching _________ at graduate school. I also have an extensive background in the following coursework________. (somehow work in UGPA as well). Your research on _______ is fascinating... Further, your expertise/research in ____, ______, and _______ suit my academic interests. If given the opportunity, I would be honored to recieve your guidance and assist your future research endeavors.

 

Thank you for your consideration.

 

 

Best Regards,

 

Hi Sylark. My opinion is that such an inquiry will not help you. From speaking with a few professors who are now just starting their second semester and very busy, there is nothing more annoying than an email from a prospective student that is crafted in a way which doesn't show in-depth analysis of their work. The catch22, of course, is that such an email will be lengthy and take a substantial amount of research to write and format in the appropriate way. These professors also do not want to read a 1000+ word email from someone they don't know right now.

 

I've only contacted a few POIs at schools of interest. Some people suggest that will harm me. But most people I talk to say it really doesn't matter. Like... really, it doesn't matter at all. Unless a professor matches your interests perfectly and you think that YOU could not live without working with them, I'd hold off.

 

Again, I don't think that these emails would hurt you chances of admission, they just wouldn't help. However, to work on these inquiries and not get a response back will damage your psyche (and for no reason). I think you are debating a very low-risk, low-reward dilemma.

 

I hope that doesn't sound harsh. I struggled throughout the year with the same issue. I wish you the best of luck. We'll all know soon enough... think positive thoughts!   

[TakeMyCoffeeBlack]

Again, I don't think that these emails would hurt you chances of admission, they just wouldn't help. However, to work on these inquiries and not get a response back will damage your psyche (and for no reason). I think you are debating a very low-risk, low-reward dilemma.  

 

There's also always the chance you can get a completely deflating, heart breaking response. I got one of those last week. I really think it was nothing more than a misunderstanding, but my ego got bruised up pretty badly (and it was not the POIs intention to offend, or at least I don't think so).

Edited January 20, 2014 by TakeMyCoffeeBlack

[o.j.]

Thanks for the quick reply. I will list a few POI's in my Feb 1st applications. Great Explanation!

 

Another question I have is about the applications I have sent to schools a month to one week ago. Could I simply email a couple POI's directly?

 

For instance,

 

"Dear Dr. ______

 

My name is ________, and I have applied to the Fall 2014 Politcal Science phD Program at ____________ . I am inquiring your interest in my academic background and research interests. My senior thesis examined _______, and I would like to continue researching _________ at graduate school. I also have an extensive background in the following coursework________. (somehow work in UGPA as well). Your research on _______ is fascinating... Further, your expertise/research in ____, ______, and _______ suit my academic interests. If given the opportunity, I would be honored to recieve your guidance and assist your future research endeavors.

 

Thank you for your consideration.

 

 

Best Regards,

 

_____________________________

(Ignore any spelling errors. The school computers don't have spell-check on their browsers)

 

Any suggestions about the tone of the email...given that emailing after sending an application is even advisable.

The idea is to keep it short and to the point, to not sound like a nuisance, and not waste the professor's valuable time.

 

Thanks in advance everyone.

I am inclined to say don't send it. The e-mail itself doesn't tell me much, partly due to the blanks but partly due to the structure too.

 

The e-mail can be improved easily, but it is almost certainly not going to achieve its stated goal. A good mail could be construed as "lobbying" for admission. Otherwise, a professor could think that you have sent the mail out of nervousness, and not give it due consideration. 

 

For those reasons, I would say don't send it. 

[silver_lining]

definitely trolls out there. 

Is it really common to see them in the results page?

 

I was wondering why someone would post fake results. My only conclusion is that they are stressed out and have become unhinged. If this is the case, I hope they get help. 

 

If you would like to join me in panic driven weeping, please do so...now...

 

The results season has barely started and I am already sleeping very little. Consider me part of the "panic driven weeping" club. 

[sylark]

Alright. Well, I'd rather not risk sending the email. You all made great points.

 

My SOP is fairly strong and in-depth about my research interests and experience. Sending an email this late could very well scream desperation and hurt my chances if I am a candidate for the short-list or bordering an acceptance decision.

 

I will have to leave it up to the adcom members to decide if my qualifications and interests are well-suited to their own. Though I never mentioned names, I did mention specific areas within the faculty members of the American Politics and Politcal Theory subfields that matched my research interests/experience. Let's hope that's enough.

 

Thanks.

[TakeMyCoffeeBlack]

Alright. Well, I'd rather not risk sending the email. You all made great points.

 

My SOP is fairly strong and in-depth about my research interests and experience. Sending an email this late could very well scream desperation and hurt my chances if I am a candidate for the short-list or bordering an acceptance decision.

 

I will have to leave it up to the adcom members to decide if my qualifications and interests are well-suited to their own. Though I never mentioned names, I did mention specific areas within the faculty members of the American Politics and Politcal Theory subfields that matched my research interests/experience. Let's hope that's enough.

 

Thanks.

 

You should be fine. Good luck!

[sylark]

You should be fine. Good luck!

Thanks for the encouragement. I just need to stop feeding into second guessing everything in my application. There's nothing else I can (or should) do.

Good Luck as well!

[jeudepaume]

I am inclined to say don't send it. The e-mail itself doesn't tell me much, partly due to the blanks but partly due to the structure too.

 

The e-mail can be improved easily, but it is almost certainly not going to achieve its stated goal. A good mail could be construed as "lobbying" for admission. Otherwise, a professor could think that you have sent the mail out of nervousness, and not give it due consideration. 

 

For those reasons, I would say don't send it. 

 

I would agree. The general advice that I have received is that—as a rule of thumb—you should email professors before you have applied. This way it is generally perceived as an attempt to get more information about the program and the professor's plans (accepts/doesn't accept students; interested in your project or not), so that you could make an informed choice to apply/not to apply.

 

If you have already applied, i.e. stated your interest, it is of no need to restate it in a personal email. As o.j. mentioned, the biggest danger here is to create an impression that you're trying to increase your chances, going behind the official process of admission. You don't want that impression. 

 

Of course, there are exceptions to this "rule of thumb."

Edited January 20, 2014 by jeudepaume

[zudei]

For general interest: the Rochester admission's committee will be meeting during the first week of Feb. so I'd say results should be out by the 10th. Good luck to everyone! It's game time!

[jeudepaume]

Alright. Well, I'd rather not risk sending the email. You all made great points.

 

Aaaand I was composing my post too long )) 

[jeudepaume]

Alright. Well, I'd rather not risk sending the email. You all made great points.

 

My SOP is fairly strong and in-depth about my research interests and experience. Sending an email this late could very well scream desperation and hurt my chances if I am a candidate for the short-list or bordering an acceptance decision.

 

I will have to leave it up to the adcom members to decide if my qualifications and interests are well-suited to their own. Though I never mentioned names, I did mention specific areas within the faculty members of the American Politics and Politcal Theory subfields that matched my research interests/experience. Let's hope that's enough.

 

Thanks.

 

In any case, good luck! I'm sure something will work out.